Fighting Traffic Camera Tickets: Strategies For Success

Getting a traffic ticket is never fun, but it's even more frustrating when you feel you didn't deserve it. In many places, traffic camera tickets are controversial and may be easier to dispute than you think. While the specifics vary depending on where you live, there are a few general strategies you can use to fight a traffic camera ticket.

Plead not guilty and request a formal hearing

If you want to dispute a traffic camera ticket, you must plead not guilty and request a formal hearing. Here's a step-by-step guide on how to do this:

Step 1: Examine Your Ticket

First, check the date, time, and location of the ticket. Camera tickets are usually sent to the owner of the car, so make sure you were the one driving when the ticket was issued. The prosecutor must prove that you were driving in that location at that specific date and time. If someone else borrowed your car, you cannot be prosecuted. However, some states like New York treat red-light camera tickets as parking violations, holding the registered owner liable. Therefore, it is important to check the red light law in the jurisdiction where you received the ticket.

Step 2: Plead Not Guilty

You can plead not guilty by mail, online, or in person at your arraignment. Your citation will specify the deadline for disputing the ticket, which is typically around 30 days. If you have no option but to appear in traffic court, show up at the date and time mentioned on your citation. Remember, you must plead not guilty if you intend to dispute the ticket, and you cannot pay the fine. In some jurisdictions, paying the fine is considered an admission of guilt.

Step 3: Request a Formal Hearing

When you plead not guilty, demand a full formal hearing or trial. You may be required to attend other hearings, such as pre-trial hearings or mediations, before your full trial. Attend these as necessary, but do not settle for anything less than a full dismissal of your traffic camera ticket.

Step 4: Request Production of Documents

Call the local police department or the law enforcement agency responsible for the camera that issued your citation. Request copies of the photos if they were not included with your citation. Additionally, ask for the full maintenance records of the camera, as well as the traffic light or speed monitoring system. This will help you establish that the equipment was regularly monitored, maintained, and tested for accuracy. If the equipment was not properly maintained or calibrated, the photo may be unreliable as evidence.

Step 5: Research Applicable Law

Look for cases in your city or county regarding traffic cameras, and check if there are any appellate court decisions about the legality of traffic camera tickets. Aside from the camera itself, there may be other recognised defences. For example, some states mandate the posting of clearly visible warning signs for cameras before a traffic light. If these signs were obscured or absent, you may have a valid defence. Additionally, some states acknowledge a necessity defence for speeding, such as when driving to the hospital in an emergency.

Step 6: Prepare for Your Hearing

Arrive at the courthouse on the day of your hearing with copies of any documents you plan to use as evidence. Ensure that you are well-organised and professionally dressed. Treat the judge and courthouse staff with respect, and refrain from doing anything that may negatively impact the judge's perception of you.

Argue that the photo is too blurry to confirm it's your car

Arguing that a photo is too blurry to confirm it is your car is a valid way to fight a traffic camera ticket. Here is some detailed information on how to do this:

Firstly, you will need to review the photos that were sent to you with the ticket. If you did not receive photos, you may need to wait until after your trial is scheduled to request copies from law enforcement. Check the photos for any blurry areas. If the license plate is not clearly visible, it may be difficult to confirm that the car is yours. If the driver of the vehicle does not look like you, this can also be used as evidence.

If the photos are blurry, you can argue that there is no clear proof that it is your car or that you were driving it at the time of the violation. You can also request the maintenance and calibration records of the camera. If there are any inconsistencies or malfunctions, this could challenge the ticket's validity.

It is important to note that the burden of proof does not rest with you. The prosecutor must prove that you are guilty and that you willingly broke the law. You have a constitutional right to plead your innocence and request a formal hearing or trial.

Argue that the prosecution can't prove you were driving

In most cases, the prosecution must prove that you were driving to convict you of a traffic violation. However, there are some exceptions where ''operational control'' is sufficient proof of driving under the law. This means that being found behind the wheel with the keys in the ignition can be enough to convict you, even if the car engine isn't running.

If you weren't driving, this is probably the most common defence for a red-light camera ticket. In most states, it's the driver, not the vehicle owner, who's liable for the violation. Many states allow owners who receive tickets to submit an affidavit swearing that they weren't driving when the violation occurred, which will usually result in the dismissal of the ticket.

If you were driving, try to reconstruct the scene and remember what you were doing at the time. For example, you may have been making a legal right turn on red when the camera took the photo. If you were making a legal manoeuvre, you should be able to get the ticket dismissed.

If there's no clearly identifiable photo of you in the driver's seat, this may be another avenue of defence. You will be under oath, so you can't argue that you weren't driving if you were. However, you can argue that the prosecution can't prove you were driving or has no evidence that you were driving. This will get you off the hook if you live in a jurisdiction that requires tickets to follow the driver, not the registered owner of the car.

If you have no choice but to appear in traffic court, show up at the date and time listed on your citation and plead not guilty. Request a full formal hearing or trial and demand that the prosecution presents evidence that you were driving.

Challenge the admissibility of the photograph as hearsay

Hearsay is defined as an out-of-court statement presented in court to prove the truth of the matter asserted. In the context of a traffic camera ticket, the photo or video evidence is considered an out-of-court "statement" that the prosecution uses to prove you violated the traffic law.

In some jurisdictions, such as Broward County, Florida, a red light camera photo is considered hearsay. However, in California, the state Supreme Court has ruled that red light camera photos are not hearsay because they are machine-created evidence, and machines cannot make statements as defined by the Evidence Code.

To challenge the admissibility of the photograph as hearsay, you can argue that:

• The photo or video evidence does not accurately represent the conditions at the time and location of the alleged traffic violation. For example, the lighting, position, perception, filters, or editing may have been manipulated to misrepresent the facts.
• There is no witness present who can be cross-examined about the substance of the photo or video evidence. In some jurisdictions, the Sixth Amendment right to confront witnesses may apply, and unless a witness appears who maintains the record and system associated with the camera, you do not have the opportunity to cross-examine them.
• The photo or video evidence is secondary evidence (a copy or facsimile), and the original copy is superior evidence.
• There is a lack of foundation for the evidence. For example, you can question whether the photo or video accurately represents the visibility, time of day, weather, or other factors relevant to the alleged violation.

It is important to note that the rules and outcomes may vary depending on your jurisdiction, so it is advisable to research the applicable laws and consult with a legal expert if needed.

Assert your right to confront witnesses

The Sixth Amendment of the Constitution guarantees you the right to cross-examine witnesses. Unless a witness appears who maintains the record and system associated with the camera, you do not have this opportunity.

You can argue that the prosecution cannot allow the photo into evidence without letting you cross-examine a witness who maintains the records and system associated with the camera. This is a violation of your Sixth Amendment right to confrontation.

The Constitution guarantees you the right to confront your accusers. This means that, without a witness to cross-examine, the photo cannot be allowed into evidence.

If no one from the company that maintains the camera shows up to testify, object to the use of the photographs for lack of foundation. For the prosecution to rely on the photos, they must present evidence that the camera that took the photo, the system that connected it to the traffic light, and the traffic light itself were functioning properly. Without establishing this foundation that all of these machines are reliable, the photo is not reliable and cannot be admitted into evidence.

Frequently asked questions